I am Hungarian, we operate the Gripens in Hungary. They are extremely satisfied with the type C/D, its latest variants and improvements. Negotiations on E/F types are now starting. You can cruise at extremely low speeds, with friendly fuel consumption and your radar is highly upgradeable. The pushing performance is not even first class, as the machine can see well. 14 machines have more than 10,000 operating hours. We already have our own developments in it. Among our older MIG-29s, one crashed every 2 years, the JASs are reliable. Everyone thinks it was an extremely good decision. Its operation is favorable. The new type is a bit expensive, but still cheaper to operate than the F35. The best defense machine, which is equal to the Russian and F35 machines. The F35 is heavy fat, time is working for the Gripens. The F35 is not stealthy, just low detectable, but visible within 10km, with good support for attack only. The Gripen could measure it. We made the right decision.
# Pete Bjerkelund / * So, at last, Sweden has taken its Rightful seat amongst our close Friends, Allies and Partners within the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance - and - as I actually was born the very same year as when John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the Very Best American President since Abraham Lincoln, held his Historical speach about - quote - "We choose to go to the moon, and do the other things, not because they're easy, but because they're hard!" - and during all those years since then, throughout my entire life, I have carried such a strong, strong desire and living hope that, one clear day, Sweden as a Nation would become a full-fledged member of NATO! But I never really thought that I would live to see that clear day arrive, because of the political naivety behind the so called "value" of keeping ahold to the military neutrality for our Nations People, so firmly embraced for centuries. But - suddenly - now, we have all seen the Historical change, the winds of our National People's will, to once and for all stand up strong for preserving Freedom and Western Democracy together with our Friends and Neighbours at LAST came! And here we are now! We are now fully Members of NATO! Good things come to those who can wait! And now, the terrific JAS 39 Gripen E/F Jet Fighter - "The Beauty and the Beast" - Actually, the SAAB JAS 39 Gripen E/F Version is truly a splendid, awesome combination of both of them - in its very own, indeed unique manner and style - and as a Swede person, I really cannot deny that I feel a strong, genuine pride of our Military Air Industry, that has got the Technical skills, professionalism and Aeronautical knowledges and capability, to enable us to create this very unique and "hard-to-beat" fighter! Bring 'em on, Mr Putin! Feel the Swedish steel bite you - really hard! Th. Benjaminsson - 🇺🇲 * 🇸🇪 * 🇸🇪 * 🇺🇲 -
@@Thbenjaminsson The moron soon to be sworn in as POTUS is on putin's side as is musk. He'll be giving putin US fighters so the Gripens are more valuable and needed than ever. He is the new Quisling. Murdoch is the new Goebbels.
I’m from the USA but I have to say Sweden has built a fantastic aircraft. It’s too bad there’s not many countries that won’t purchase it. Considering the cost of fighter jets, the Gripen would be a good alternative.
As a swede I would say its becuse of politics.. overall it aint 5th generation but you have very fast service between flights and its away. flighthours are cheaper as well. Its the best bang for the buck.
The F35 and Gripen cost almost the same, but the running price of the Gripen is 25-35% of the F35 .... and you can run it with less ground crew and lesser educated ground crew. And it is has been shown that it can take on the F35..
To compare Gripen with a F35 I think you need to see interviews with Pilots around The Globe. The F35 is in another level of Tech. And a great Plan. PS I live in Denmark.
There was doubt whether Denmark (Neighbor to Sweden) should join Sweden and buy Gripen E, but for several reasons, perhaps mostly because of easier cooperation with USAF the F35 was chosen, at a cost which was astounding so only two dozens were bought. I think that a greater army of Saab Gripen would have been a much better choice and I hope that DK-Airforce later will join and add Gripens, because they are so much cheaper to fly and better suited to a small country without many airstrips, because Gripen can be serviced on anything flat longer than 500 meter - believe it or not!
The F-35 is cheaper per frame but yes the maintanance is much more expensive. But you have to understand that the F-35 is not only a fighter but rather a force multiplier in an airforce. It has unmatched situational awareness capabilities plus it has a lower RCS than usual fighters. It can be used for reconnaissance missions, for various air to ground missions with extreme precision and it can carry nuclear warheads. Its not the fastest jet and cant carry a lot in its internal bays but its not meant for that, its more meant to work together with other aircraft. Its powerful radar can do many more things than a regular fighter and in worst cases where an AWACS gets shot down, the F-35 could in theory even take over some task of an AWACS untill its replaced. Its like a mini AWACS thats really stealthy, fast and has theoretically the best BVR capabilities. Also it can guide missiles fired from behind it like a grippen, take over the missile and guide it to the target. The two would work together rather than replace each other. They are very different aircraft
@@angelaferkel7922 The Gripen is up there with the best in situational awareness too, as well as e-warfare. The F35 definitely has a smaller RCS then the Gripen, but while the Gripen isn't full stealth it's a low signature plane, and small to boot, so the difference isn't as huge as it could be. Both will have situations where they're invisible to enemy sensors and situations where they're detected. The F35 is intended to fly more over enemy territory, so it needs more stealth then the Gripen, a plane that for the most part can be expected to fly over friendly, or at most, contested territory, not a enemys homeland. The F35 isn't necessary that much better. It's intended for a different role. It's like with the nuclear subs. Swedens Gotland class subs are actually quieter then US nuclear subs when both are trying to be as silent as possible. For defense the Gotland class is just as deadly, as demonstrated in exercises with the US navy. But it's also unable to operate as far away from a base as a US nuclear subs is, or for as long. Swedish weapons makes far more defense economic sense for most countries then US weapons do, with more capability for the money in a defense role. US weapons generally offer more offensive power, but might struggle in real war conditions occasionally if key assumptions turns out to be wrong. For instance the F16 needs airfields far cleaner then what can be expected on a battlefield where air superiority is contested, and so does the F35. The Gripen doesn't have that problem, making it better suited for a frontline role. The F35 however is far better suited for missions from further behind friendly lines crossing *into* enemy territory then the Gripen is. They compliment each other. The Gripen can help defend the F35s airstrips, the F35 can strike into territory too protected for the Gripen to penetrate, potentially creating openings for the Gripen to exploit. The threat of there potentially being F35s in the air might also discourage some missions against the Gripen.
Sweden here!! Congrats to more stuff from Sweden to Ukraine heroes...Combat Boats CB90, Combats vehicles CV90:s, 155mm shells, Carl Gustavl 84 mm recoilless rifles, Robot RBS70 ect. Greetings from Sweden!
I'm an American in Sweden and will be watching the soon-to-be moron-in-chief kiss putin's ass as he pulls out of NATO. Finland and Sweden joined at the perfect time!!
@@michaelbowes9894 No in Gripen E the engine is based on the General Electric F414. The RR Avon engine was used in the old Saab 35 Draken. Viggen JA37 used a modified Pratt & Whitney
I know we are a part of NATO. And the F35 is an awesome aircraft. But we (Denmark) could have had double the fleet RIGHT now, if we had gone for the Gripen E. For the same price, or less. Spare parts and munitions, would be an hour away....
Well... being part of the Gripen project you actually get all the information needed to build it yourself... some things have to be sent from Sweden though.
Coming from Germany I just shake my heads why people go with the F-35 which is such an over designed and not really yet fully working system … Saab also impressed me with their aviation design.
I didn't know the world had such a delicate ego until RUclips showed me ANYTHING new always shocks the world whether it is a new battery or engine or aircraft or missile or WHATEVER shocks the whole world except that I don't know about it until I visit You Tube AMAZING
I think one of the most important things is the simplicity. Swedish fighters are designed to be easy and cheap to service and can receive extensive service even at a temporary airfield and the work being done by conscripts with a few months of training. Add short take off and landing and it makes deployment very flexible. short take off and landing allows the airforce to use straight parts of roads as improvised airfields. A good idea if the enemy would attack the regular airfields. With the very versatile selection of weapon loads this makes deployment of these fighters very flexible.
It is a jet that was ahead of its time, and probably cross-influenced the Eurofighter and Rafale's development since they all share similar delta-wing+canard configuration.
Without actually knowing what I'm talking about - I've gotten the impression that one of the main differences is the expectancy of ground support. F35 expect a reasonable air strip and decent ground service (that you can expect the US military to offer), while Gripen expects that "Uh, shit happened at the airstrip, but we still have a bit of road and a couple of guys in a truck" (that maybe is what you should be prepared for in a smaller defense with limited resources).
Agreed.The Draken, Viggen and Grippen all stand as good comparisons but overall, since WW2 Sweden has never been slouches in their arms industry all round. They will make great allies in NATO
Gripen is not came from griffon. Gripen, comes from Gripas. Gripas was a mythological monster in greek mythology. Has head and wings of eagle, body and feet of lion and for tail has snake. Gripen as a symbol means that someone or something, has the capability to face the enemy to every direction.
Pretty sure the lack of export sales is due to political pressure from the U.S. It will be interesting to see if anything changes with Sweden’s accession into NATO.
It might change a bit, certain acountries that did plan to buy Gripen, as Gripen filled their asked for role better, but in the end choose American because of Nato, and Sweden beeing outside Nato. So we could see SAAB closing a few new future deals because of it now finnely beeing part of Nato, Swedens arms industri has for a long time wished Sweden to join Nato for this reason alone.
The only western fighter aircraft that is manufactured from the drawing board to be able to operate from bases in the forest is the Swedish Gripen in wartime, Sweden must operate from bases in the forest to have any chance of operating our warplanes for any length of time The Gripen is made to take off and land from normal car roads Gripen can be refueling and rearming, including reloading the gun and attaching air-to-air missiles, can be completed in less than 10 minutes with only one technician officer and five conscript mechanics and costs much less in maintenance and in flight compared to the F16 The Gripen can handle both American and European weapons such as the IRIS-T, the Meteor missile and the RBS15 anti-ship missile, Taurus cruise missile, etc. Gipens 39 RCS is of 0.5 to 0.1 sq.m depending on the model F15 of 25 sq.m F16 is of 5 sq.m F18 is of 0.5-2 sq.m depending on the model F35 is 0.05 sq.m F22 is 0.001 sq.m China's J-20 is 0.1-5 sq.m probably something in between The F 22 Raptor RCS shows how far ahead the US is source Sandboxx and thedtechind.wordpress.com/2020/06/10/rcs-of-4th-generation-fighter-jets/ The Gripen A and C have performed well when participating in the Read Flag exercise, better than the F16, F18 and F15 A Swedish Air Force pilot flying Gripen C at Red Flag in the US has never lost an engagement ever against a US designed fighter He has not flown against F-22 and F-35, but F-15, F-16 and F/A-18s have only been his prey, not his nemesis. the F-22 and F35 are the only operational American fighter that can give Gripen any substantial trouble in Red Flag exercise but Gripen C can also be dangerous for F22 In America Gripen C in an exercise against the F-22 Raptor the F-22 did not detect the Gripen until it was in a position to kill the F22 Raptor source of the above see links below www.quora.com/How-does-the-Saab-JAS-39-Gripen-compare-to-the-F-16-Fighting-Falcon www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=11311&start=2880 www.globaldefensecorp.com/2021/01/07/gripen/ the new SAAB 39 Gripen E model performs in a completely different class it is not fair to compare the SAAB 39 gripen E model with the F16 F15, F16, F18 F already have big problems with gripen A and C model The SAAB 39 Gripen E is more on par with the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II in terms of sensors, radar, Supercruise, etc. now the F35 does not have Supercruise Gripen first participated in Red Flag 2006 with the Gripen A It was assigned to the red team. Reduced AWACS, reduced ground support. The Gripens connected their link systems and acted themselves as AWACs, got the battlefield awareness necessary and avoided all ground defense, scored 10 kills the first day including a Typhoon No losses were recorded on day one they remained undetected. One Gripen pilot knocked down five F-16 Block 50+ during close air combat in Red Flag Alaska. And the Gripen never lost any aerial encounter or failed their mission objectives. It was the only fighter that performed all planned starts, while others were sitting on the ground waiting for the weather to clear up. during a combat exercise with the Royal Norwegian Air Force, 3 Swedish Gripens went up against 5 RNAF F-16's. The result was 5-0, 5-0, 5-1 after having flown 3 rounds And no disrespect to any other fighters, including Norwegian pilots because they're just as well trained 'During Loyal Arrow in Sweden, 3 F-15C's from the USAF were intercepted by a Gripen acting as an aggressor. The result was 2 F-15's shot down and one managed to escape due to better thrust/weight source for the above see link below www.globaldefensecorp.com/2021/01/07/gripen/ www.czdefence.com/article/the-gripen-e-is-comparable-to-the-f-35a-in-many-ways Or look at Professor Justin Bronk at RUSI, his particular areas of expertise is the modern combat air environment ruclips.net/video/q-lcu2kBXQI/видео.html eurasiantimes.com/jas-39-fighters-precisely-designed-to-fight-russia-british/?amp The SAAB E model has further improved the technology so that the Russian S400 has a very difficult time seeing the Gripen E before it is too late now some of this technology is based on technology from the USA that SAAB has integrated with its technology SAAB has developed a completely unique software that means that in the middle of a flight mission, the Gripen can change its combat task, for example from hunting to ground attack Sweden has applied for nato membership and the video below covers Sweden's arms manufacturing which nato is happy to include in the deal if you just want to see what the Gripen has to offer then go to 9.06
The name is not pronounced "Grippen"... it is pronounced "Griiiipen", or maybe "Greeepen" if you are English.. Meaning "The Griffon". The latest Swedish planes are always named in singular definite article "The...". A32 is called Lansen (The Lance), J35 Draken (The Dragon), J37 Viggen (ambiguous name, but often translated as The Thunderbolt). And I skipped all different designation as JA, AJ, SH, SF, SK etc. prior to the numbers... JAS 39 is "The Griffon". By the way, J means Jakt/Fighter, A means Attack/Bomber, attacker on ground/sea targets, S means Spaning/Reconnaissance , SH specialized reconnaissance over sea, SK is the Skol or training variant. If using AJ, it means the version is dedicated to Attack, but also have great capabilities in Jakt (fighter).
It wasn’t a new aircraft, if it’s only a variant of the JAS 39 Gripen than it’s not a new plane. Trust me, my dads friend work for SAAB AB and test flight the airplanes before they enter service. The most modern version of the Gripen 39 is the NG and E version
ALL the Swedish jet fights have had fairly cool names like: Griffon, Dragon, Thunderbolt, Lance, HuntingFalcon (Specific spiecis), Barrel, and all with duality to it's names. Gripen = Griffon / Apperhanded / Awestrucked. Draken = Dragon / Kite (Delta wing shape). Viggen = Thunderbolt / Duck squadron. Lansen = Lance / Formation front. Jaktfalken = gyrfalcon (Worlds largest falcon breed, arctic/northerend bird), also just means The Hunting Falcon. Tunnan = Barrel (It had a barrelshape) / The Keg (as in Powder key, ready to make you explode) / Hot tub.
loss in tech? jas can make other planes radar to see 10 planes but theres only 1....they jam out others radars....jas is more tech than any usa plane....why do you think us wanted us onboard nato? usa cant even find our u-boats....they rented one u-boat from us for 7 years and couldent find it....theres why usa want us in....our tech.
@@joacimholgersson2730 This is actually true. A single Gothland class submarine managed to sink the carrier Ronald Reagan several times during one training mission and was never detected. USA then asked if they could rent the submarine + crew for a few years. :)
@@michallmaxlarsen8923 gripen has more tech than f 35...for the half of price...its have the same weapons but gripen has electronic jam device that interfear other planes...nothing us made planes have.
The Grippen is a far better multi-role fighter choice for the European theatre than the more complex F-16. Second more European countries should seek European-built weapons to increase their defense industry.
If this Fighter Jet was made by USA or Russia, it would have been bought by dozens of country. Countries choose to buy a military equipment not just for the specs and performance but more for political alliance.
South Africa should not have an air force when they cannot afford to maintain the smartest manufactured fighter aircraft in the world with low maintenance costs. But it's like in all these Brick countries all the money goes to corruption
With Sweden now a NATO member, this fighter could end up in the hands of Ukraine, which was developed for the EXACT some type of war they are fighting against Russia.
The question is, should Finland have chosen the Gripen over the F-35? The US is so politically unstable so we don't know how long they will be our allies. Their defense industry will in any case continue to deliver because that means jobs and money but Trump loves dictators so we never know.
It made sense at the time I reckon? Finland was pretty much on track to join NATO, making the F-16 the natural choice of fighter jet. If Sweden would choose to join Nato or stay out of the Alliance was anybodys guess at the time. So if Finland joined Nato and bought Gripen Fighter Jets from Sweden, a non-nato country it would just have Frakked up the whole interoperability and shit like that for no good reason. But after Bunker Grandpa in his Moscow underground nazi bunker komplex made the bright decision to invade Ukraine it became clear that both Sweden and Finland would join Nato. The only problem now is the fact that Turkey is blocking Swedish entry into the alliance. Too much support for the Kurdish diaspora. You know, the guys the helped us kick the living shit out of Isis before President Bonespur gave them the finger and told them to F off. But Swedes are a forgiving people and we won't act the same way and block Turkey from becoming an EU member state by using our veto... Nooo, we will let them in to our community. We will aim to get Turkey full EU-membership in just a few hundred years or so... No biggie.
I don't think europe should seese relationship with U.S.A. but we should work closer together and "play each other good." I think Finland should have gone for Gripen. Denmark also went with the F-35. Personally i would have voted for the Eurofighter.
Agree. Griffins, Eurofighter, and Rafales would be the best for Europe. Finland should have gotten Griffins. But I think both Sweden and Finland should have Rafales as well.
Svenska SAAB Gripen är bland av det bästa (försvars/attack) flygplan som finns. Okay att USA, F36 (heter det så?) är nog ett steg lite bättre. (Yes I'm a Swedish)
Jet looks good with equipped latest weapons but the design of Gripen always not impressive Jet look like 3rd generation wings tail and very sharp nose with antenna that makes worse looking if stay together with F22 F35 J20 and SU53 Design Department should design better make jet look real deal with scare factors Double fins at the back / Change wings design/ corkpit /Landing gear/ shape of aircraft make it awesome like f22 make customers like it but now as stand Dassault Rafale and Gripen Jes are the worse design fighter jet on the table
Sure Gripen-E is new and not at all the same plane as Gripen-C. but still this plane is old now, i dont undestand how people missed it and misunderstood it.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
I am Hungarian, we operate the Gripens in Hungary. They are extremely satisfied with the type C/D, its latest variants and improvements. Negotiations on E/F types are now starting.
You can cruise at extremely low speeds, with friendly fuel consumption and your radar is highly upgradeable. The pushing performance is not even first class, as the machine can see well. 14 machines have more than 10,000 operating hours. We already have our own developments in it. Among our older MIG-29s, one crashed every 2 years, the JASs are reliable. Everyone thinks it was an extremely good decision. Its operation is favorable. The new type is a bit expensive, but still cheaper to operate than the F35. The best defense machine, which is equal to the Russian and F35 machines. The F35 is heavy fat, time is working for the Gripens. The F35 is not stealthy, just low detectable, but visible within 10km, with good support for attack only. The Gripen could measure it. We made the right decision.
Have only tried the Gripen E as a physical simulator. I.e. a real cockpit.
I must say, that it's SO user friendly and easy to fly
Even for a non pilot
What I think?
I think I want an E model in the hanger for a late Christmas present.
Well presented.
All the best
Very pretty and spicy little bird! The Swedes do design with enthusiasm!
The Gripen is what we (Canada) should have bought, instead of the Flying Laptops. JAS39 suits our job, budget and geography far better.
# Pete Bjerkelund /
* So, at last, Sweden has taken its Rightful seat amongst our close Friends, Allies and Partners within the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance - and - as I actually was born the very same year as when John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the Very Best American President since Abraham Lincoln, held his Historical speach about - quote - "We choose to go to the moon, and do the other things, not because they're easy, but because they're hard!" - and during all those years since then, throughout my entire life, I have carried such a strong, strong desire and living hope that, one clear day, Sweden as a Nation would become a full-fledged member of NATO! But I never really thought that I would live to see that clear day arrive, because of the political naivety behind the so called "value" of keeping ahold to the military neutrality for our Nations People, so firmly embraced for centuries.
But - suddenly - now, we have all seen the Historical change, the winds of our National People's will, to once and for all stand up strong for preserving Freedom and Western Democracy together with our Friends and Neighbours at LAST came! And here we are now! We are now fully Members of NATO! Good things come to those who can wait!
And now, the terrific JAS 39 Gripen E/F Jet Fighter - "The Beauty and the Beast" - Actually, the SAAB JAS 39 Gripen E/F Version is truly a splendid, awesome combination of both of them - in its very own, indeed unique manner and style - and as a Swede person, I really cannot deny that I feel a strong, genuine pride of our Military Air Industry, that has got the Technical skills, professionalism and Aeronautical knowledges and capability, to enable us to create this very unique and "hard-to-beat" fighter!
Bring 'em on, Mr Putin! Feel the Swedish steel bite you - really hard!
Th. Benjaminsson - 🇺🇲 * 🇸🇪 * 🇸🇪 * 🇺🇲 -
"Flying Laptops" 😂😂😂
@@Thbenjaminsson The moron soon to be sworn in as POTUS is on putin's side as is musk. He'll be giving putin US fighters so the Gripens are more valuable and needed than ever. He is the new Quisling. Murdoch is the new Goebbels.
I’m from the USA but I have to say Sweden has built a fantastic aircraft. It’s too bad there’s not many countries that won’t purchase it. Considering the cost of fighter jets, the Gripen would be a good alternative.
It's better than F-35 and several times cheaper!
As a swede I would say its becuse of politics..
overall it aint 5th generation but you have very fast service between flights and its away.
flighthours are cheaper as well.
Its the best bang for the buck.
The F35 and Gripen cost almost the same, but the running price of the Gripen is 25-35% of the F35 .... and you can run it with less ground crew and lesser educated ground crew. And it is has been shown that it can take on the F35..
To compare Gripen with a F35
I think you need to see interviews with Pilots around The Globe.
The F35 is in another level of Tech. And a great Plan.
PS I live in Denmark.
i believe PH readying to acquire 3-4 squadrons of these instead of F16s and Koreas KF21.We already have the FA50s of SoKor
There was doubt whether Denmark (Neighbor to Sweden) should join Sweden and buy Gripen E, but for several reasons, perhaps mostly because of easier cooperation with USAF the F35 was chosen, at a cost which was astounding so only two dozens were bought. I think that a greater army of Saab Gripen would have been a much better choice and I hope that DK-Airforce later will join and add Gripens, because they are so much cheaper to fly and better suited to a small country without many airstrips, because Gripen can be serviced on anything flat longer than 500 meter - believe it or not!
The F-35 is cheaper per frame but yes the maintanance is much more expensive. But you have to understand that the F-35 is not only a fighter but rather a force multiplier in an airforce. It has unmatched situational awareness capabilities plus it has a lower RCS than usual fighters. It can be used for reconnaissance missions, for various air to ground missions with extreme precision and it can carry nuclear warheads. Its not the fastest jet and cant carry a lot in its internal bays but its not meant for that, its more meant to work together with other aircraft. Its powerful radar can do many more things than a regular fighter and in worst cases where an AWACS gets shot down, the F-35 could in theory even take over some task of an AWACS untill its replaced. Its like a mini AWACS thats really stealthy, fast and has theoretically the best BVR capabilities. Also it can guide missiles fired from behind it like a grippen, take over the missile and guide it to the target. The two would work together rather than replace each other. They are very different aircraft
@@angelaferkel7922
The Gripen is up there with the best in situational awareness too, as well as e-warfare.
The F35 definitely has a smaller RCS then the Gripen, but while the Gripen isn't full stealth it's a low signature plane, and small to boot, so the difference isn't as huge as it could be.
Both will have situations where they're invisible to enemy sensors and situations where they're detected.
The F35 is intended to fly more over enemy territory, so it needs more stealth then the Gripen, a plane that for the most part can be expected to fly over friendly, or at most, contested territory, not a enemys homeland.
The F35 isn't necessary that much better.
It's intended for a different role.
It's like with the nuclear subs.
Swedens Gotland class subs are actually quieter then US nuclear subs when both are trying to be as silent as possible.
For defense the Gotland class is just as deadly, as demonstrated in exercises with the US navy.
But it's also unable to operate as far away from a base as a US nuclear subs is, or for as long.
Swedish weapons makes far more defense economic sense for most countries then US weapons do, with more capability for the money in a defense role.
US weapons generally offer more offensive power, but might struggle in real war conditions occasionally if key assumptions turns out to be wrong.
For instance the F16 needs airfields far cleaner then what can be expected on a battlefield where air superiority is contested, and so does the F35.
The Gripen doesn't have that problem, making it better suited for a frontline role.
The F35 however is far better suited for missions from further behind friendly lines crossing *into* enemy territory then the Gripen is.
They compliment each other.
The Gripen can help defend the F35s airstrips, the F35 can strike into territory too protected for the Gripen to penetrate, potentially creating openings for the Gripen to exploit.
The threat of there potentially being F35s in the air might also discourage some missions against the Gripen.
@@Luredreier very well said
@@angelaferkel7922
Thank you. :-)
in the netherlands we say the same, especialy with the cost overuns
Thank you from a belgian of the Philippines
Why does that matter?
Sweden here!! Congrats to more stuff from Sweden to Ukraine heroes...Combat Boats CB90, Combats vehicles CV90:s, 155mm shells, Carl Gustavl 84 mm recoilless rifles, Robot RBS70 ect. Greetings from Sweden!
the gustaf !
@gerhardrausing777 They got punked by a color revolution funded by the state department in 2014.
🤡
I'm an American in Sweden and will be watching the soon-to-be moron-in-chief kiss putin's ass as he pulls out of NATO. Finland and Sweden joined at the perfect time!!
I think "Volvo Glygmotor" is spelled wrong. It should be "Volvo Flygmotor" (freely translated to Volvo Flight Engine) which is a part of Volvo Aero.
"F" and "G" are close on the computer.
@@bafattvahetere
True, but for someone not knowing Swedish the spelling is not obvious.
Yes, it should be "Flygmotor".
I think I recall that the engine is a development of the tried and trusty RR Avon.
@@michaelbowes9894
No in Gripen E the engine is based on the General Electric F414.
The RR Avon engine was used in the old Saab 35 Draken.
Viggen JA37 used a modified Pratt & Whitney
If I remember it correctly the Gripen E has the new radar system where you can make one plane to look like three to the enemy radar
Very Informative Video
WaW .....i think that this is the only fighter jet I've seen so far with a dashed out cockpit layout as seen in the video here!!
I know we are a part of NATO. And the F35 is an awesome aircraft. But we (Denmark) could have had double the fleet RIGHT now, if we had gone for the Gripen E. For the same price, or less. Spare parts and munitions, would be an hour away....
Well... being part of the Gripen project you actually get all the information needed to build it yourself... some things have to be sent from Sweden though.
NO 30 MINUTES AND YOU COULD HAVE FLOWN TO
SWEDEN TO SERVE THEM
ALL AT A MUCH LOWER
PRICE! SORRY!
Coming from Germany I just shake my heads why people go with the F-35 which is such an over designed and not really yet fully working system …
Saab also impressed me with their aviation design.
stealth
@@intoximacatedim starting to see stealth as a dumb tiktok trend
Thank you from Philippines
I didn't know the world had such a delicate ego until RUclips showed me ANYTHING new always shocks the world whether it is a new battery or engine or aircraft or missile or WHATEVER shocks the whole world except that I don't know about it until I visit You Tube AMAZING
The longest sentence I ever read without , and .
I think one of the most important things is the simplicity. Swedish fighters are designed to be easy and cheap to service and can receive extensive service even at a temporary airfield and the work being done by conscripts with a few months of training. Add short take off and landing and it makes deployment very flexible. short take off and landing allows the airforce to use straight parts of roads as improvised airfields. A good idea if the enemy would attack the regular airfields.
With the very versatile selection of weapon loads this makes deployment of these fighters very flexible.
Can't wait to fly this beast in DCS!
That camo makes it look so Pretty! :D
Funny how the narrator called sweden "switzerland" all of a sudden. 🤣
Sweden Switzerland. Another sad mixup at 7:01. Why is this so hard...?
Sorry Sweden, if it wasn't because the Danish politicians were so deeply buried in the American pockets, then it was this plane we should have bought.
Its ok. The US could probably give you a better deal on counter purchases and such. Besides, we werent in Nato at the time. 😉
I second that. We should have supported our swedish brother AND gotten a far better aircraft in the process.
This has been my favorite fighter jet from the day i learned it was a thing. Gripen is awesome, wonderful video.
It is a jet that was ahead of its time, and probably cross-influenced the Eurofighter and Rafale's development since they all share similar delta-wing+canard configuration.
The Viggen had the same configuration as the one before that. SAAB kicks ass!
💥💥💥💥😎💥💥💥💥
SWEDEN 🇸🇪
GRIPPEN JETS are
TOP 3 MOST
" UNDER-RATED " Jet fighter ✅
Love Swedish pragmatism and innovation!
Without actually knowing what I'm talking about - I've gotten the impression that one of the main differences is the expectancy of ground support. F35 expect a reasonable air strip and decent ground service (that you can expect the US military to offer), while Gripen expects that "Uh, shit happened at the airstrip, but we still have a bit of road and a couple of guys in a truck" (that maybe is what you should be prepared for in a smaller defense with limited resources).
Sweden has always been ahead of its time.
Agreed.The Draken, Viggen and Grippen all stand as good comparisons but overall, since WW2 Sweden has never been slouches in their arms industry all round. They will make great allies in NATO
@@stephenbesley3177 Gripen (Griffon). Robots and huge guns are the biggest contribution to Nato.
Gripen is not came from griffon. Gripen, comes from Gripas. Gripas was a mythological monster in greek mythology. Has head and wings of eagle, body and feet of lion and for tail has snake. Gripen as a symbol means that someone or something, has the capability to face the enemy to every direction.
@@koukiasnikolaos2 Yes, a Griffin in English.
Nice videos and informations
Despite all the major Intelligence services knowing anything about it, IT SHOCKED THE WORLD! (Laughable).
Beautiful jet.
God bless Sweden ❤
THANK YOU, I SAY AS A SWEDISHCTICEB!
GRIPEN E IS MORE ADVANCED THAN A/B/C
TYPES!
Cool video
amazing fighter jet
Pretty sure the lack of export sales is due to political pressure from the U.S. It will be interesting to see if anything changes with Sweden’s accession into NATO.
It might change a bit, certain acountries that did plan to buy Gripen, as Gripen filled their asked for role better, but in the end choose American because of Nato, and Sweden beeing outside Nato.
So we could see SAAB closing a few new future deals because of it now finnely beeing part of Nato, Swedens arms industri has for a long time wished Sweden to join Nato for this reason alone.
the grippen and f35 don't fill the same role, one is a light, capable short range fighter/interceptor, the other is a multirole stealth fighter.
For an example Argentina can not by this plane because of political pressure from the U.K (Falkland islands)
Excelente jet fighter, i think Portugal should buy for there air force
Gripen exist, but not the photo shown on top.
I do not think that the government of Switzerland has placed any order regarding the griffin😄
They will be supplied by USA with F-35s. I think that he just made a misstake mentioning Switzerland instead of Sweden.
Switzerland and Sweden 😂... the chance to mix them up is never missed.
I love how the picture at 4:25 clearly shows 9 hardpoints, not 7, and that even when "he" said 7, 9 was visable... 🤦🏻♂️
The only western fighter aircraft that is manufactured from the drawing board to be able to operate from bases in the forest is the Swedish Gripen
in wartime, Sweden must operate from bases in the forest to have any chance of operating our warplanes for any length of time
The Gripen is made to take off and land from normal car roads
Gripen can be refueling and rearming, including reloading the gun and attaching air-to-air missiles, can be completed in less than 10 minutes with only one technician officer and five conscript mechanics
and costs much less in maintenance and in flight compared to the F16
The Gripen can handle both American and European weapons such as the IRIS-T, the Meteor missile and the RBS15 anti-ship missile, Taurus cruise missile, etc.
Gipens 39 RCS is of 0.5 to 0.1 sq.m depending on the model
F15 of 25 sq.m
F16 is of 5 sq.m
F18 is of 0.5-2 sq.m depending on the model
F35 is 0.05 sq.m
F22 is 0.001 sq.m
China's J-20 is 0.1-5 sq.m probably something in between
The F 22 Raptor RCS shows how far ahead the US is
source Sandboxx and thedtechind.wordpress.com/2020/06/10/rcs-of-4th-generation-fighter-jets/
The Gripen A and C have performed well when participating in the Read Flag exercise, better than the F16, F18 and F15
A Swedish Air Force pilot flying Gripen C at Red Flag in the US has never lost an engagement ever against a US designed fighter
He has not flown against F-22 and F-35, but F-15, F-16 and F/A-18s have only been his prey, not his nemesis.
the F-22 and F35 are the only operational American fighter that can give Gripen any substantial trouble in Red Flag exercise
but Gripen C can also be dangerous for F22
In America Gripen C in an exercise against the F-22 Raptor the F-22 did not detect the Gripen until it was in a position to kill the F22 Raptor
source of the above see links below
www.quora.com/How-does-the-Saab-JAS-39-Gripen-compare-to-the-F-16-Fighting-Falcon
www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=11311&start=2880
www.globaldefensecorp.com/2021/01/07/gripen/
the new SAAB 39 Gripen E model performs in a completely different class
it is not fair to compare the SAAB 39 gripen E model with the F16
F15, F16, F18 F already have big problems with gripen A and C model
The SAAB 39 Gripen E is more on par with the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II in terms of sensors, radar, Supercruise, etc.
now the F35 does not have Supercruise
Gripen first participated in Red Flag 2006 with the Gripen A It was assigned to the red team. Reduced AWACS, reduced ground support. The Gripens connected their link systems and acted themselves as AWACs, got the battlefield awareness necessary and avoided all ground defense, scored 10 kills the first day including a Typhoon
No losses were recorded on day one they remained undetected.
One Gripen pilot knocked down five F-16 Block 50+ during close air combat in Red Flag Alaska.
And the Gripen never lost any aerial encounter or failed their mission objectives. It was the only fighter that performed all planned starts, while others were sitting on the ground waiting for the weather to clear up.
during a combat exercise with the Royal Norwegian Air Force, 3 Swedish Gripens went up against 5 RNAF F-16's. The result was 5-0, 5-0, 5-1 after having flown 3 rounds
And no disrespect to any other fighters, including Norwegian pilots because they're just as well trained
'During Loyal Arrow in Sweden, 3 F-15C's from the USAF were intercepted by a Gripen acting as an aggressor. The result was 2 F-15's shot down and one managed to escape due to better thrust/weight
source for the above see link below
www.globaldefensecorp.com/2021/01/07/gripen/
www.czdefence.com/article/the-gripen-e-is-comparable-to-the-f-35a-in-many-ways
Or look at Professor Justin Bronk at RUSI, his particular areas of expertise is the modern combat air environment
ruclips.net/video/q-lcu2kBXQI/видео.html
eurasiantimes.com/jas-39-fighters-precisely-designed-to-fight-russia-british/?amp
The SAAB E model has further improved the technology so that the Russian S400 has a very difficult time seeing the Gripen E before it is too late
now some of this technology is based on technology from the USA that SAAB has integrated with its technology
SAAB has developed a completely unique software that means that in the middle of a flight mission, the Gripen can change its combat task, for example from hunting to ground attack
Sweden has applied for nato membership and the video below covers Sweden's arms manufacturing which nato is happy to include in the deal if you just want to see what the Gripen has to offer then go to 9.06
The name is not pronounced "Grippen"... it is pronounced "Griiiipen", or maybe "Greeepen" if you are English.. Meaning "The Griffon". The latest Swedish planes are always named in singular definite article "The...". A32 is called Lansen (The Lance), J35 Draken (The Dragon), J37 Viggen (ambiguous name, but often translated as The Thunderbolt). And I skipped all different designation as JA, AJ, SH, SF, SK etc. prior to the numbers... JAS 39 is "The Griffon". By the way, J means Jakt/Fighter, A means Attack/Bomber, attacker on ground/sea targets, S means Spaning/Reconnaissance , SH specialized reconnaissance over sea, SK is the Skol or training variant. If using AJ, it means the version is dedicated to Attack, but also have great capabilities in Jakt (fighter).
I read thst they have just started to plan and discuss and bring a new fighter to come after the Griffin. A Team of People gathered together...
In 2025 a new fighter will be presented by SAAB.
The "E" needs to be rolled into NATO strategy as a component to hold the MLR.
It wasn’t a new aircraft, if it’s only a variant of the JAS 39 Gripen than it’s not a new plane. Trust me, my dads friend work for SAAB AB and test flight the airplanes before they enter service.
The most modern version of the Gripen 39 is the NG and E version
The thumbnail shows a plain with V-Tail, which is a lie.
Yes!
Clickbaiting...
🤦🏻♂️ where is the thumbnail?🤷🏻♂️
Exactly... clickbait.
It's very specific to carry 3.4 tones of fuel. I mean, how many could you need? ;)
Its been around longer than RUclips, maybe even the Internet. I recall seeing the prototype at Farnborough in 1982.
You forgot to mention Which version
The prototype - version !
I saw them flying in 1983 over northern Sweden
Amazing
¡Excelente!
Gripen is the real Firefox...
Im Swedish and when you was gonna say Linköping I first thought you was pronouncing some chinese word haha (No hate)
JAS 39 Gripen (Griffin in Eng). Nothing else!
Aerodynamics must be excellent to go so fast and far with a single engine that is the same as F-18 Super Hornet but faster than the American fighter
Damn, Saab used a great name for this fighter. You would think an American company would use a cool name like this.
ALL the Swedish jet fights have had fairly cool names like:
Griffon, Dragon, Thunderbolt, Lance, HuntingFalcon (Specific spiecis), Barrel, and all with duality to it's names.
Gripen = Griffon / Apperhanded / Awestrucked.
Draken = Dragon / Kite (Delta wing shape).
Viggen = Thunderbolt / Duck squadron.
Lansen = Lance / Formation front.
Jaktfalken = gyrfalcon (Worlds largest falcon breed, arctic/northerend bird), also just means The Hunting Falcon.
Tunnan = Barrel (It had a barrelshape) / The Keg (as in Powder key, ready to make you explode) / Hot tub.
Ukraine needs this fighter jet urgently!!!
The know how to fly it doesnt come in a box of cereals....
The need is not what determin the result.
No.
Popular export? We wish...
If the fighter can travel past and maintain Mach 1 with no afterburner... isn't that supercruise?
Yes. Yes, it is.
I think The Gripen is a weird aircraft, it's both ugly and beautiful at the same time.
Its cold Jas Gripen
If thats so. Any prof ? Any Combat kills ? Any real combat experience?
Libya they did well, no planes on scorelist but quite a few targets on ground.
*Let the Sunshine In...*
*thanks*
.
This channel appears to be the home of clickbait!
I heard, now it is hard for them to sell this gripen!
Excellent fighter jets
*_I_*_ want one!_
canada did not need a strategic bomber-f35
Switzerland? Why do people confuse these two? Sweden... and nothing else
next time dont do clickbait.
But for the price Gripen is good
But it miss a lot of tech.
And new engines in The F35.
Gives it 30% lnger Range and + 20% more speed.
the speed you only need away from the target...and in full speed you loss in range and the cost get skyhige
loss in tech? jas can make other planes radar to see 10 planes but theres only 1....they jam out others radars....jas is more tech than any usa plane....why do you think us wanted us onboard nato? usa cant even find our u-boats....they rented one u-boat from us for 7 years and couldent find it....theres why usa want us in....our tech.
@@joacimholgersson2730 This is actually true. A single Gothland class submarine managed to sink the carrier Ronald Reagan several times during one training mission and was never detected. USA then asked if they could rent the submarine + crew for a few years. :)
@@TemalCageman wrong again....usa rented the sub for 7 years...still dossent find it.
@@michallmaxlarsen8923 gripen has more tech than f 35...for the half of price...its have the same weapons but gripen has electronic jam device that interfear other planes...nothing us made planes have.
Clickbait thumbnail, this video is only about the gripen
I’ve all ways been partial to SAAB aircraft
Look historically at a project that didn't be. SAAB 36 ,Reminiscent of SR 71
The Grippen is a far better multi-role fighter choice for the European theatre than the more complex F-16. Second more European countries should seek European-built weapons to increase their defense industry.
Where is the New Saab fighter jet?????
If this Fighter Jet was made by USA or Russia, it would have been bought by dozens of country. Countries choose to buy a military equipment not just for the specs and performance but more for political alliance.
I have a SAAB (9-5)
The world is in shock again? Wow! Click bait…
nice bird
This is what Ukraine should have.
Volvo Glygmotor? Volvo Flygmotor..
Das ist Betrug wenn sie ein falsches Bild benutzen..und in Video geht's um andere Flugzeug...betrügen ist nicht schön👎👎👎
South Africa should not have an air force when they cannot afford to maintain the smartest manufactured fighter aircraft in the world with low maintenance costs. But it's like in all these Brick countries all the money goes to corruption
missed the opportunity to call the dragen a dorito war plane
i like it
With Sweden now a NATO member, this fighter could end up in the hands of Ukraine, which was developed for the EXACT some type of war they are fighting against Russia.
I stand for my son's life!
Euh... say what?
The question is, should Finland have chosen the Gripen over the F-35? The US is so politically unstable so we don't know how long they will be our allies. Their defense industry will in any case continue to deliver because that means jobs and money but Trump loves dictators so we never know.
It made sense at the time I reckon? Finland was pretty much on track to join NATO, making the F-16 the natural choice of fighter jet. If Sweden would choose to join Nato or stay out of the Alliance was anybodys guess at the time. So if Finland joined Nato and bought Gripen Fighter Jets from Sweden, a non-nato country it would just have Frakked up the whole interoperability and shit like that for no good reason.
But after Bunker Grandpa in his Moscow underground nazi bunker komplex made the bright decision to invade Ukraine it became clear that both Sweden and Finland would join Nato. The only problem now is the fact that Turkey is blocking Swedish entry into the alliance. Too much support for the Kurdish diaspora. You know, the guys the helped us kick the living shit out of Isis before President Bonespur gave them the finger and told them to F off.
But Swedes are a forgiving people and we won't act the same way and block Turkey from becoming an EU member state by using our veto... Nooo, we will let them in to our community. We will aim to get Turkey full EU-membership in just a few hundred years or so... No biggie.
Trump loves cheeseburger
That a load of rubbish ,trump loves dictators
I don't think europe should seese relationship with U.S.A. but we should work closer together and "play each other good."
I think Finland should have gone for Gripen.
Denmark also went with the F-35. Personally i would have voted for the Eurofighter.
Agree. Griffins, Eurofighter, and Rafales would be the best for Europe. Finland should have gotten Griffins. But I think both Sweden and Finland should have Rafales as well.
Svenska SAAB Gripen är bland av det bästa (försvars/attack) flygplan som finns.
Okay att USA, F36 (heter det så?) är nog ett steg lite bättre. (Yes I'm a Swedish)
New?
The latest version is new. "E"
Why always this Alien-Fighters to announce the videao?
this is not the video of the picture advertise , i dislike
oficialmente jamas entro en combate
Why enjoy? Where is he New Fighter Jet???
Why its named gripen is bc when he made the gripen he got gripen it means arrested
Nope...Gripen is the vulture is a fairy-tale animal that is half eagle and half lion.
Jet looks good with equipped latest weapons but the design of Gripen always not impressive Jet look like 3rd generation wings tail and very sharp nose with antenna that makes worse looking if stay together with F22 F35 J20 and SU53 Design Department should design better make jet look real deal with scare factors Double fins at the back / Change wings design/ corkpit /Landing gear/ shape of aircraft make it awesome like f22 make customers like it but now as stand Dassault Rafale and Gripen Jes are the worse design fighter jet on the table
Sorry!!!!!!!!
Gripen mean Caught.
"by the government of switzerland"... Sweeden=Swiss
Sure Gripen-E is new and not at all the same plane as Gripen-C. but still this plane is old now, i dont undestand how people missed it and misunderstood it.
So, how would you compare it’s age to the F35?